The most optimistic proponents of what is known as “in silico” research predict a time when 99 per cent of drugs research might be conducted at a computer screen rather than in a “wet” lab. What is particularly worrying for the biotechnology companies is that big regulatory bodies such as the US Food and Drug Administration could soon go down the virtualisation route.Mr Donofrio believes the critical analogy here is the fate of the aerospace manufacturers when 3D computer modelling became the industry standard. Boeing’s 777 jet was created and tested entirely on a computer. A decade ago, it would have been unthinkable to build a plane without constructing real models, he points out; now it would be unthinkable to design without 3D simulations. And it was not long before the authorities that regulate the safety of aeroplanes came to accept the results of computer-simulated tests.On a far higher level of complexity, the same is now happening to biotechnology, and could, according to the analysts, force a similar outcome at a corporate level. With money tighter than ever, and computing demands growing exponentially, the biotech industry could be pushed into a series of defensive mergers, leaving the scene dominated by just a few players.

Again, that situation would create particular issues in the UK.Some companies have already embraced the idea of going totally “in silico”, and are being nervously eyed by their competitors. As a lesson to the UK sector, the very new German biotech company 4SC – heavily invested in IT – is now able to process in one day what would take other biotechs a month. “The time is fast approaching when what we are doing will be the industry norm,” says the group’s chief executive, Ulrich Dauer. “We have the accuracy, the speed and we don’t waste time with drugs that are not going to work.”. ord Puttnam, the film producer turned Government adviser, is unassuming in the flesh but far from reticent in his views on the media.

The Oscar-winning producer of Chariots of Fire and The Killing Fields is irritated by the quality and integrity of the press. Lord Puttnam, the film producer turned Government adviser, is unassuming in the flesh but far from reticent in his views on the media. This legislation will change the rules on who can own the UK’s newspapers and TV stations and who will regulate them.Media coverage of the committee’s 170-page report has focused on the issue of foreign ownership of our TV stations. At present, companies from outside the European Union aren’t allowed to own terrestrial stations like ITV and Channel 5. The Government is proposing to scrap this law.But Lord Puttnam’s committee recommends that it delays this decision to allow the proposed new media regulator, Ofcom, to investigate more thoroughly.

It says sufficient evidence has not yet been provided of the benefits, such as increased investment, or that risks like a lower quality of programming have been addressed. “Once you’ve made the decision to allow foreign ownership of the media, there’s no going back,” he says. “You can’t reverse it a few years later in the light of experience.”The Government has said it isn’t taking any notice, though whether Parliament will agree is less certain.Lord Puttnam says, however, that this recommendation has been misinterpreted as anti-American. He says the committee simply wants proof that it is the right thing to do to open up our media sector and not just based on free market ideology.To demonstrate his pro-American credentials he points to his work with US film studios, which included a stint as the head of Columbia Pictures in the 1980s. And while he expressed concerns about the cultural dominance of Hollywood in his book The Undeclared War, he also criticised European efforts to artificially block the US celluloid influx.Nevertheless, a recent Financial Times article, under the title “Chariots of bilge”, delivered a stinging attack on the report and its “prejudice” against the US.Lord Puttnam hits back: “For the FT to accuse me and the committee of being blinkered is outrageous, because we did our homework We did weeks and weeks of homework. Whoever wrote that FT leader hadn’t given it 30 seconds’ thought And that hurts. That’s why it is wrong.”Lord Puttnam is particularly irritated, as a self-confessed “newspaper junkie”, because his father was a Press Association reporter.